Habs 1992-93 season flashback: Roy shuts out Sabres

As we wait and hope for an end to the NHL lockout, Canadiens fans can relive the 1992-93 season – the last year the Habs won the Stanley Cup – at HIO as we post game stories from that season.

The Habs took a 16-6-3 record into a game against the Buffalo Sabres on Nov. 30, 1992 at the Forum. Below is Red Fisher’s story from that game:

Canadiens blend defence with offence

CANADIENS 3
SABRES 0

RED FISHER
THE GAZETTE

Was it as long ago as four games into the season that the Canadiens went into Buffalo on a high and came out of the city as low as any bunch can get?

Remember?

The Embarrassment was an outgrowth of the Canadiens being outshot, 50-26, crashing 8-2 and coming home to a 6 a.m. team meeting and a 7 a.m. practice called by their kindly ol’ coach, Jacques Demers.

“If we learned anything in that game,” Kirk Muller was saying after last night’s 3-0 win over the Sabres, “it was that we didn’t want to get into a shootout with them. We haven’t seen them for a while, so we didn’t really know what to expect, but shootout was out.”

Strong, controlled, heady play was in – and was there a better example of it than the Stephan Lebeau goal midway through the second period after Vincent Damphousse and Denis Savard had scored goals in the first?

It started with the Sabres clearing the puck to Patrick Roy, who was to post his first shutout in 35 games, and then heading en masse for their bench. Line and defence changes, you know.

That, of course, left a chasm all the way down the ice to goaltender Roy’s right, so it’s Roy to Mike Keane on this side of the centre ice line, Keane to Damphousse, over to Lebeau – and it’s No. 13 from close in for Bobo.

At the other end, goaltender Roy pounded his gloved fist into the air several times, skated in several small circles, raised his arm again – looking all the while like someone who was tremendously pleased with his contribution to a goal which effectively left the Sabres dead in he water.

“You don’t get chances like that too often,” Roy was to mention much later. “There was only one thing to do … one way to go. It was a big goal, too. I tried it against the Bruins with Damphousse, but (Andy) Moog made a big stop.”

“Patrick read it well,” said Damphousse.

“We’ve tried it before,” said Muller, “but it didn’t work because we were a little slow on the passes. Patrick said we should try it again, though.”

“It was a dumb play on our part,” said Buffalo coach John Muckler.

There’s something to be said for all of the above, but what’s certain was that there wasn’t much left in the Sabres after the goal – presuming they had something going for them earlier.

The fact is, the Canadiens were better than their three-goal margin. In other words, the hot-and-cold Daren Puppa had to be on top of his game to contain the Canadiens.

The Canadiens honor roll was a long one on this night.

Damphousse, who was playing in his 500th NHL game, was on fire in a first period which produced little offence until he beat Puppa with a power-play goal with fewer than four minutes remaining and Savard added another 62 seconds later. The goal came on the Canadiens’ 12th shot of the period – the Sabres had been held to five – and Savard got his eighth of the season after some unflinching work in concert with Lebeau and Eric Desjardins.

The Canadiens defence was splendid, as a group, led by Desjardins and Mathieu Schneider. Roy was, well, Roy. All in all, this bunch excelled as a team, not the least among them being the line of Guy Carboneau, Patrik Carnback and Todd Ewen – which did a man-sized job of taking away all of what Pat LaFontaine normally brings to an arena.

The Canadiens, you should know, are having fun.

Equally important is that they’re making it fun for the people who have been without it for too long a time.

`Fun’ is three Canadiens sweeping in on one Buffalo defender during a short-handed situation and Kevin Haller forcing Puppa into a giant stop.

It’s the Sabres promptly turning it around with a three-on-one of their own – only to have Desjardins spoiling the party with a formidable, second-effort defensive play.

Then, seconds later, it’s Roy producing the period’s, if not the game’s, best save, followed not much later with his exemplary reading of the Sabres which had him punching the air with glee after the firm of Keane, Damphousse and Lebeau made it work.

Now, the Canadiens find out if they can make it work on the road, as well, with games in Boston, Winnipeg, Chicago and against the Kings in Phoenix.

95 Comments

This online community is dedicated to you. Created in order to provide a place where you can post your questions about on In a business dominated world, we all know that FIRST IMPRESSIONS is everything. Leaving a mark with your client is very important. Call 1-877-660-6776 now to learn how your business can use custom Wood business card to stand out and make a good impression on clients and colleagues!

With two goals by Doug Gilmore on the board, and the seconds flying by, it looked like the Montreal Canadiens would lose the Stanley Cup on home ice for the first time ever. You could see it in the eyes of the Falmes players, they looked like they were celebrating already, up 4-2, with 1:25 to go in the 3rd period. the Montreal bench was despondent, Pat Burns was trying hard to keep composure, Shayne Corson was glowering, he looked about ready to rip someone’s head off (more than usual) Mats Naslund’s eyes were glazed over and he was staring into space, oblivious to the action on ice in front of him, mumbling incoherently, next to him on the bench, Bob Gainey was motionless, his head bowed low, hopeless, at 35 he was basically finished, injury had worn him out in the past 3 seasons, he had made the decision to retire some time ago, and selected the end of the 88-89 season as the date. “but does it really have to end like this??” the Canadiens captain thought to himself, but there was nothing that he, or any of his weary, disappointed teammates could do about it.

Larry Robinson had other ideas.

On the next line change, with the worn out top pairing of Chelios and Sovboda coming in, Burns sent out Big Bird and his current Defense partner, Rick Green. Robinson was a living legend, he had once been a force to be reckoned with, the perfect D-man, dominant in all aspects of the game, and (as Mike Milbury, Dave Schultz, Louis Sleigher, and many, many more found out) not afraid to throw down if the situation required it. But now he was pushing 40, not the offensive force he had once been, nearing the end of his rope, everyone knew it. But he was not going to go out a loser, no way.

Green and Robinson made a formidable, if aging Defense paring. Their minutes had been gradually reduced over the past two seasons, in favor of the team’s younger defencemen. The Flames skaters were going through the motions, not worried about the listless habs skaters, focusing more on impending victory then on the moment at hand. Robinson and Green, men on a mission, started out in the same manner as their teammates did, lifeless, awaiting the inevitable end of the game. But then, with a surprising burst of uncharacteristic speed, Green blasted across the blueline, flattened Al MacInnis with a solid check, stole the puck and flew towards the Flames net, the orange jerseys on ice stood in shock, disbelieving that the stationary, pedestrian blueliner that was Rick Green could be capable of such moves. They drove towards him, intent of smothering his slim chance, but not before he raised his stick to wire a wrister at Mike Vernon, only to hit the oncoming Robinson with a backpass. Big Bird then hit a streaking Stephane Richer with a saucer pass from the Flames blueline. Richer fired a characteristically hard shot straight at the Flames net which Vernon was unable to stop.

4-3, with 51 seconds to go. It was a brand new game.

The play was frenzied for the next half minute, both sides scrambling, with little results.

20 seconds to go, Patrick Roy is pulled, and an extra skater, Naslund is thrown on. He picks up a desperate clearing attempt by Theoren Fleury and hits the jets, weaving through the orange jungle that was the neutral zone, fakes a shot, and passes the puck to Bobby Smith who ripped loose a slapper just as he was hauled down by former hab Rick Natress. Vernon deflects the shot, however, seconds later Shayne Corson crashed the net, and fiercely jammed home a rebound, tying the game 4-4.

The Forum exploded.

The Falmes, robbed of certain victory were shocked, and angered, and that played right into the Canadiens’ hands. A minute and five seconds into overtime Burns threw out his checking line: Claude Lemieux, Brian Skrudland, and Mike McPhee. Lemeiux was able to draw a cross-checking penalty from Joel Otto, which put the game on the line. Seconds later Russ Courtnall scored on the power play, ending the game and forcing game 7.

The flames, robbed of certain victory, were shocked and furious, they played undisciplined hockey in game 7, a slug-fest that featured a furious bout between Gary Roberts and Craig Ludwig (the only game 7, Stanley Cup finals fight in history), numerous borderline hits, 2 goals by Guy Carbonneau (!), and a Patrick Roy shutout, the final score was 2-0 Montreal.

The Habs had won their 24th Stanley Cup. Roy won his second Conne Smyth trophy.

Ok, considering that the lockout show no signs of ending, and could very well eliminate the season, I am considering posting extended Alternate History Featurettes on………. you guessed it!, THE MONTREAL CANADIENS, as an ultimatum of sorts, I will post one per week, until the lockout ends. They will cover such topics as The Chelios Trade, The 2003 Draft, the 2009 free agency, the Pacioretty incident, and much, much more, looking at the events from a “what if??…” perspective!!

They will be similar to the surrealist game simulations that JohnBellyful attempted earlier in the Lockout.

If any HIO members object to this, please comment in the space below. I will listen to your arguments, and If enough of you object, I will delete this post, and pretend this never happened.

You are mistaken, sir.
My ‘attempted’ surrealist game simulations were, in fact, dispatches from an alternative reality at a time yet to arrive that has already been.
One caution: keep your lines intact. Once you start tweaking all hell breaks loose.

Here we go again on the merry-go-round. First post didn’t get published. Second one did (this one), and so did its first edit, but not second edit that included the first post.
This could drive a man to drink.
I’d rather walk.

The petition fell short by one vote. One vote!
(Apparently, though, I can’t post anything longer that 75 words. And I can’t use the word ‘actuarial’. Nothing to do with the site rules. I just don’t know what it means.

Edit: Hey, wait a minute! You’re sorry it was someone else that got banned and not me?
Sufferin’ succotash!

Before I begin, I must disclose that I am a high school teacher. I have had a couple different careers before this – research dude in a computer science/engineering lab, and engineering dude at an electronics manufacturer. Neither of those jobs appealed to me so I came to teaching later in life. I’m also mid-30s and I’ve been teaching for about 10 years.

Chris, we are both smart guys. Both smart enough to know that there we some veiled shots in your original post.

1) I will agree that public school teachers have it pretty good with job security, vacation time, and pay. I’ve never felt underpaid. I think we are well compensated for what we do. There’s no question that the remuneration package is a pretty sweet. As well, I’ve also felt frustration that some of my lesser colleagues are protected for life. That is not to devalue what we do, however. I can tell you that this job is by far the most demanding of the serious, career-type jobs that I’ve had. It’s incomparable, really. Being an average teacher is immeasurably harder than working as an average lab researcher or average engineer.

2) you’ve got far more education than most high school teachers? I wouldn’t say “far more.” you have a phd, likely. Every high school teacher (in nova scotia, at least) has a bachelors degree in their specialty and another in education. A good chunk have masters degrees, too. In the relative scheme of how canadians are educated, you have a bit more than some teachers and somewhat more than others. And this is all irrelevant anyway, for two reasons. One: if aspiring teachers needed to get masters or PhDs in their subject area, they would. They are educated to the level they need to teach, and this is understandable, due to reason two… Most teachers (the good ones) understand that it isn’t about how well educated you are in your subject area – the real trick to teaching is actually knowing how to effectively ready your kids and help them understand the material in their terms. In short – teaching high school today is 20% subject knowledge and 80% other skills. I don’t buy the argument that being better educated makes one a better teacher, or deserving of more salary.

3) I don’t mean to sound disrespectful, Chris, but I highly doubt you have all the same responsibilities I have and more. Highly doubt. I hae university prof friends and we often compare. I could list the many, many tasks I’m responsible for on a daily basis (phone calls home, monitoring the cafeteria during lunch, breaking up fights, administering the breathalyzer at the high school dance, traveling with my high school hockey team and making sure theyre in their hotel room at curfew, the list goes on and on), but maybe I could ask you: you ever have all tour students over to your house for a pizza party to help them study for their final exams? Or have a kid show up at your house late at mith because her homophobe father disowned her because she was gay? This is the sort of thing high school teachers deal with. So excuse me if I’m a little skeptical at the idea that a university prof has the same level of responsibility as my colleagues.

3) if you’re upset at your pay (you say you’re not, but maybe you are?), then the option is always open to you to return to school, get your education degree, and become a high school teacher. There are plenty of areas in any curriculum to extend the students and challenge them. Besides, real teaching isnt about subject material, it’s about the students learning.

4) accusing guidance counselors of pushing their students to avoid physics is a dangerous claim, too. I would hope you’d have some hard evidence of that.

In short, this an incredibly hard job. I’ve often wondered why I didn’t just stay in engineering, where I could do a reasonably decent job, get paid more (yes, more), be able to leave my job at work and just go home at the end of the day, surf the web for rhe latest HIO posts, and actually take a pee when I want to. I’m not complaining, though. This is an incredible job and the kids keep us young, engaged, and eager to go to work every day. There isn’t a day I spend where I am not totally exhausted but incredibly grateful.

Maybe I read into your post meaning that wasn’t there. I’m quite sure I don’t know the situation with union in Ontario. I’m not really a union guy, anyway. I wish I didn’t have to be in one. But when I hear people even taking tangential shots at this profession, I think: man no one knows what this job is all about until one does it for awhile. I certainly didnt, back when I was an engineer. I’m pretty sure university professors don’t either.

Thanks for reading, if you got this far.

Now I’m going to my high school hockey game. Because it is part of my job. It’s 8pm on Friday night, I’m leaving my wife and kids at home, and I’m going to go refuse admittance to drunk kids and wait around after the game to make sure kids get home safely. I’ll get home around 11pm or so.

You know…there’s a built in capability in all humans to do something unique and fascinating…we can ignore what others post.

I should know since most of my posts have been ignored by some of the best folks on this site for years.

Now, I’m not for a minute suggesting that anything Twi says should be ignored…no, far from it…but he can be ignored if you choose…your choice…hey, you can even ignore me..go ahead, try it…all the cool kids are doin’ it.

Believe me, I’m one of the most sympathetic people around when it comes to the profession of teaching.

Remember that many of the students in university are living away from home for the first time; when they hit the rough spots in their lives, they often turn to us to fill in the guidance roles that used to be filled by their teachers and their parents. You might be surprised how many of the personal details you mentioned we also deal with. I happen to be one of the people the students feel very comfortable approaching, so I spend a ton of time on helping students figure out what to do with their lives or directing them to the appropriate people for help when necessary.

I don’t have to coach sports as a part of my job. I’ve never put it on my resume, and I never will. It is something that was done for me as a child, and I want to pay it forward.

I’ve never had students to my house…I would be begging for trouble as a single guy on that front. But I am routinely in the lab, my office or help sessions late into the evenings helping my students with their work. I also volunteer tutor for the varsity athletes on campus to help them catch up after all the classes that they miss due to their sports commitments.

As I mentioned before, don’t read any disrespect into the profession. My disrespect lies with the teacher unions, not with individual teachers themselves, in general.

Regarding my guidance councillor comment regarding physics, that is information that is increasingly being reported by students coming into first year over the past decade. Anecdotally, we’ve also seen our high-school equivalency physics course increase from about 75 students to over 750 students over the past decade.

I don’t know why
No negotiating tonight
When the best hockey world
With whom you’ve crossed and you’ve quarreled
And let down so
For so many reasons we don’t know
To push forever the unrest
With all the demons you possess
Bettman you are a goon

Maybe Fehr was right
No maybes, I miss hockey
I want you to fight
I’m tired of no more glory

I’m going for a drive
With all our vampires and my bride
Delirious but fine
And longing for a life
Beyond the thought of goons

Maybe Fehr was right
No maybes, I miss hockey
Will you do what’s right
I’m tired of no more glory
I’m standing in the street
Screaming out to you
No more stories
Bettman you are a fool

So far away – another place
They’ve trained themselves – That’s where they play
B’tin’ more than chewed, God it gets to you

All the fans are right
Because we all miss hockey
We want you to fight
Bring back the game that we play
I’m standing in the street
Screaming out to you
No more stories
I hope this will end soon

Maybe Fehr was right
No maybes, I miss hockey
Do you want to fight
I’m tired of no more glory
I’m standing in the street
Screaming out to you
No more stories
C’mon outside, you tool

I hope the Bruins a-hole owner Jacobs is part of this next round of “negotiations” and someone on the player side pulls his jacket over his head and beats the crap out of him. It shouldn’t be surprising that the Bruins owner is an even bigger ass than his players and the key owner behind this mess. It comes from the top, no question.

Just when you think that you have heard everything…………..oh, never mind, this is just beyond belief. This is even more stupid than the woman who sued McDonald’s and won after she spilled hot coffee on herself.

The McDonald’s coffee story is quite a sad one. It has become the poster child for the frivilous lawsuit, but in reality was anything but.

The jist is this: That particular location had been advised/warned that it was serving it’s coffee well above the proper temperature and had never done anything about it.
When this lady spilled the coffee on herself, it was so hot that the burns it caused, through clothing, required skin grafts and reconstructive surgery. Think about that for a second… The coffee was so hot she required surgery to recover from the wounds. It wasn’t a red rashy 2nd degree burn, but a destructive, crippling mid to far end of the spectrum 3rd degree burn.
She initially sued, looking only for medical expenses. McDs dragged it out, and PRed her into a laughing stock. That’s how it all escalated.

There is actually a really interesting movie about it called Hot Coffee i believe. (It also deals with companies like Haliburton making people waive legal rights to pursue lawsuits and instead enter binding mediation etc).

I think it is worth while for everyone to become educated about the McD’s coffee lawsuit, if only because it is so often thrown around as a meaningless, frivilous, greedy dumb person lawsuit while it is anything but that.

The part of the story the Media under reported and that McDonald’s doesn’t want you to hear.

1) The coffee was 30 degrees hotter than any other maker in the area (including the local starbucks). They literally served her a glass of still boiling water.
2) The injuries due to the spilled coffee had the woman in hospital for four weeks, needing surgery and skin grafts due to the massive trauma the scalding coffee caused to her groin region.
3) The woman sent an offer to settle the case to McDonald’s asking merely for the cost of her hospital bills and not a penny more. McDonald’s refused.
4) Despite this woman’s significant injuries, the McDonald’s franchise where the coffee was served refused to change the temperature at which they serve coffee, or place warnings at their restaurant that the coffee was much hotter than elsewhere.
5) Jury members later commented to reporters that they felt the franchise owner and the McD’s executives came off as callous and greedy when they took the stand. They said that the reason they wouldn’t sell coffee at a normal coffee temperature was that they did a survey and found they would get 10% more sales by having the hottest coffee in the area. (People in this area liked to pick up coffee, put it in a cup holder, and not drink it til they arrived at work, hotter coffee was better as it was still hot at work)
6) Contrary to media reports. The woman was NOT driving when she spilled coffee on herself, she was in the passenger seat with her son driving. The vehicle was also parked in the parking lot and she was taking the lid off the coffee to add her cream and sugar. There is some dispute (as it is nearly unprovable) as to whether the lid was secured properly when the drive through worker handed her the coffee.

– All of this from my law textbook on the case. It would appear that the media sensationalized this story, by making the injured women into some kind of idiot for spilling coffee on herself while driving and then suing mcdonalds. They seem to have left out a bunch of key facts.

“On February 27, 1992, Stella Liebeck, a 79-year-old woman from Albuquerque, New Mexico, ordered a 49-cent cup of coffee from the drive-through window of a local McDonald’s restaurant located at 5001 Gibson Boulevard S.E. Liebeck was in the passenger’s seat of her grandson’s Ford Probe, and her grandson Chris parked the car so that Liebeck could add cream and sugar to her coffee. Liebeck placed the coffee cup between her knees and pulled the far side of the lid toward her to remove it. In the process, she spilled the entire cup of coffee on her lap. Liebeck was wearing cotton sweatpants; they absorbed the coffee and held it against her skin, scalding her thighs, buttocks, and groin. Liebeck was taken to the hospital, where it was determined that she had suffered third-degree burns on six percent of her skin and lesser burns over sixteen percent. She remained in the hospital for eight days while she underwent skin grafting. During this period, Liebeck lost 20 pounds (9 kg, nearly 20% of her body weight), reducing her down to 83 pounds (38 kg). Two years of medical treatment followed.”

The Woman was 79 yrs. old. If she was in her 30’s I could agree with you on the stupid aspect. My Mom is 77 and she has problems opening a lot of things. So I can understand her spilling it (coffee) while trying to get the cover off.

On the topic of the 92/93 season, has anyone had a chance to read Todd Denault’s latest, A Season in Time? I’m about three-quarters of the way through and I can’t wait to see how it ends 🙂 Seriously, it’s a really good read and a must-have for all the Habs fans on your Christmas list.

I sort of lost my zest, to be honest. In a nutshell though, I take umbrage with what you wrote on the last thread:

“…I can’t spare much sympathy for the teachers in Ontario, because they have it MUCH better than most of us who teach for a living in the university system. I’m staring at contracts for eternity…there are no full-time jobs. I’m not talking tenure-track either (another dinosaur that needs to disappear), simply full-time jobs that will allow me to commit to living in something other than a room in somebody else’s house.

I’ve got far more education than most high school teachers and work far longer hours. I have all the responsibilities that they do, but I have some extra ones as well. The difference is that I get paid about half of what they do, if that, and I receive no benefits and can expect no pension at the end of the journey.”

I think you know my various beefs with what you wrote. If you don’t then I guess I’ll have to get detailed about it.

My comment was not a complaint about my own situation; I’m very accepting of the fact that we’ve got a massive fiscal problem and my generation is going to have to downgrade our expectations a little as we get back to a sustainable level. I am getting to do the thing I love most, which is paramount to me despite the absolutely insane hours and the low relative wages and the complete lack of job security.

My basic sniff test is whether society can afford to have everybody living in the way that is being discussed. What would happen if all Ontarians were paid at the same rate and offered the same benefit and retirement packages as teachers? We know the answer, beyond any shadow of a doubt. We would be bankrupt within a decade.

Canada, and Ontario in specific, faces a massive financial crisis, one that does not receive nearly enough attention. We have over $1 Trillion in public debt between all levels of government (municipal, provincial and federal) in Canada, most of it racked up over the past 50 years. This is nothing more than a generational tax being passed along until some poor generation gets saddled with the crippling bill.

Salary rollbacks, reduced benefits and lowered expectations for retirement must all be on the table if we have any hope of leaving our children and grandchildren with anything other than a ticking time-bomb. There is absolutely no question in my mind that the status quo is simply not sustainable. The changes to the status quo are going to hurt, and they are going to hurt a lot.

I’m willing to take those hits, and I have. It annoys me to no end to see the teacher’s federation saying all the wrong things publicly. It is either tactless bargaining or they are simply oblivious to reality. I know which one of those options I believe.

I’ll just cushion that statement by saying that this is almost universally true. People from all professions really need to critically assess the mess we are currently in and downgrade expectations moving forward. If you take an even more global view, that we’re all sharing the planet and should share the benefits, than Canadians are **really** exhibiting hubris, because there is no way this planet can support 7 billion people living the way we do.

Chris it is beyond frightful for me to watch how the Education and Health Sector operate from a fiscal perspective. I won’t even weigh in with my feeling as it relates to your discussion with Twilight, but as a person in the private sector who does a great deal of business with these two specific sectors it is beyond recognition the wasteful spending.

If you really want to gag, come check out the way universities spend money. It is disgraceful.

I feel terrible for the students, and I feel a lot of anger towards the stakeholders here. There is so much money either wasted or spent frivolously, yet you hear constant whining about chronic underfunding.

There are huge issues. But let’s optimize the process first, and then see where we stand.

Believe it or not Timo the CPP is now actually performing quite well. Granted when you steal whatever amount it was that the Feds took a few years back it helps. But currently on a yearly basis the CPP is outperforming the Ont. Teachers Pension quite significantly. Not that the Ont. Teachers Pension is any kind of a benchmark anymore mind you.

I was more concerned with the shots you took at public school teachers, to be honest. And so I’d ask, if you don’t mind, if it’s a better gig to teach high school, why would you teach at the university level instead?

Twilight: Don’t interpret it as a shot at public school teachers. Interpret it as a shot that increased years in school must necessarily equate to a higher salary at the end, a common point parroted by so many of the young teachers.

That formula is collapsing all over the place as we see massive numbers of people graduating with university degrees.

In terms of why I chose to teach at the university level, the subject that I love teaching, physics, is slowly dying in the high school curriculum. Guidance councillors are pushing their kids to avoid physics, and kids are more than happy to avoid it.

My original plan had always been to go to teacher’s college upon graduating from high school and teach in high school. I just found the challenge of teaching science at an even higher level appealed to me. I get bored very easily, and the material being taught in high school physics is not all that challenging, especially with all the carnage that the idiots in the school boards have inflicted on the math and science curricula here.

Ian – The NHLPA would never agree to this. It would lead to massive loss of jobs. At least 200 by my count. Either Quebec City or a 2nd GTA team would lose out on a future franchise. Al least a half dozen solid US teams would lose franchises. Travel would be brutal.

I hear what you’re saying but the reality is the present NHL set-up (outside of Phoenix) isn’t that bad. In fact, it may well be a 32 team league by the end of the decade.

A NHL European division (which could take the league to 40-42 teams) is a possibility. That’s quite doable.

Under their current CBA, there is no way the NHL can even contemplate moving into Europe. There is a huge legal hurdle confronting them: the NHL’s current method of running its affairs (restricted free agency being the biggest one) is illegal under European Union labour laws, as was already established by the Bosman ruling.

So before the league can even dream about starting a European division, they need to abolish the entry draft and make every player in the NHL eligible for unrestricted free agency after their contract expires, regardless of their age or tenure. There is really no way around those two.

Judging by the hard-line stance in this work stoppage, I just can’t see the North American owners giving up the control over their players that they currently enjoy to expand into Europe. And judging by the position taken by many fans, who seem to support limiting entry-level contracts and especially second contracts, the fan support might not be there.

If the NHL were smart, it would leave growth of the game in Europe to the European leagues, otherwise it is opening a can of worms that the owners seem intent on keeping firmly closed.

I was hoping to expand the game and maybe have a European division that would be a somewhat separate entity with some token cross Atlantic play by both sides. Eventually that “division” would contend for the Cup along with the three (or four) NA divisions.

You know, Chris, I sometimes get the felling that even though it’s a 30 team league in the 21 century, we’re still not that far removed from the days of the old original six.

Not talking politics again, but it’s unreal how the Toronto Star is going after Mayor Ford (not that he doesn’t deserve it!). Talk about a fall from grace.

Regarding a European division for the NHL, I’m not sure how it could work logistically. That division would have to have an entirely different labour agreement in place to fit around European labour rules. This would mean that, for all intents and purposes, the European division would have to operate almost completely independently of the North American NHL operations. In a case like that, I’m not sure what they would hope to gain.

The NFL and NBA are also eyeing European expansion and faces the same hurdles. As much as people love the game, the contract issues are pretty formidable.

The Star has not exactly covered themselves in glory on that front. I’m not a big fan of Ford, but the public pile-on is getting ridiculous, and a newspaper should be approaching that issue with a little more journalistic integrity than they have.

Journalists are supposed to remove their own personal biases from their writing, but the Star’s columnists and reporters are definitely spinning things in such a way that their own feelings on the matter are pretty clear.

In some ways it is similar to the players challenging the owners to a game of hockey to determine whose proposal is used. The owners are primarily a group of people whose best work/skillsets are in a boardroom negotiating, this is how many accrued their wealth. The players best skills are on the ice playing a game.

So in fairness then it should be best of 3, the boardroom session as offered by the NHL, a hockey game (players vs. owners) and then the third challenge will be a game of pin the tail on the donkey.

During the last lockout, the players who disagreed with Goodenow brought their AGENTS to negotiate with Bill Daly.

If the NHL wants something like that, great. I think the PA might even go for it if Don Meehan or Pat Brisson, or other highly connected agents were in the room instead of the Fehr brothers. But going directly to the players, with no agent representation… thats not gonna fly IMO.

They should have the agents talk to the owners. It seems a bit odd to me that the players have agents to negotiate contracts with teams but don’t use those same agents to negotiate a contract (CBA) with the league. I think that the agents should have been involved in CBA negotiations all along.

Note that some players prefer to negotiate their own contracts with a team, those players should be free to talk CBA with the owners if they want to (but they don’t have to if they are not comfortable doing so themselves or if they just prefer to have their agent do it for them). So I say let them (agents, interested players and owners) talk CBA and have the Fehrs, Bettman and Daly sit one out for a change.